Science Humanity's Descendants

[Doktor Jivaneanof]

I have a question to ask you all: What do you think the next species in the Homo genus after us will be like.

Please don't answer with (Humanity's gonna be extinct soon anyway, so why does it matter?) or similar, and please answer seriously. I'd like to know your legitimate opinions on this subject, so if you can't comply with either of the above, then please don't answer.

 

[Rachael of the Shire]

I believe in Creation, myself. However, I do believe that people will adapt to whatever environment they are in, and that adaptation can cause small changes within a species. Like people in one environment may be pale, while people in a different environment my be darker skinned due to factors such as sunlight and geography. I think that there will eventually be one race, one civilization, and one language. Any other changes would only occur if an extreme change in the environment made it necessary.

 

[The Gunrunner]

Look at the previous generations over thousands of years, and add the benefits that we've already accumulated. The problem with the classifications between the different species (that is, the species history) is that there is no exact point where it officially becomes its own 'species.' The exact point that this generation, right now, can't reproduce with the later generation? Why should the first compared species be of THIS generation and not the one after, or the many before?

I remember watching Richard Dawkins in response to the gaps argument in the fossil record ('we haven't found ____ yet!',) and he pointed out that if we had literally every single period of transition then it would be impossible to make a decision on when one is a different species, because the transition is so miniscule in each generation. The reason the names aren't literally made out of feeling within a spectrum of 'these two can't reproduce with each other,' is because of the gaps in the record. At least, that how I understand it. Could obviously be wrong.

So my smart-ass answer is: What your kids look like; evolution happens at every single new generation.

My non-smart-ass, but still disappointing, answer is: Taller, more muscle mass. Adaptations because of greater food supply, essentially. Also something about us all being variations of a 'mixed race' in there.

The dramatic answer, that is the great variation between now and what we'd commonly consider a new 'species': No idea.

Woo!

 

[Imperator_tenebrae]

People are going to answer that way regardless so you better get used to it. I hate it when shit posters ask for opinions then exclude most opinions because it might hurt their delicate sensibilities. That's not how it works.

I will answer this way that humans are not evolving but rather devolving because if we are take an account of the nature versus nurture argument, the decadence and decay of society, mainly in the Western world, humanity is at a crossroads now. Humanity as it stands now is becoming self-evident that its destructive and nihilistic ways may not be its undoing but it'll definitely set us back technologically and socially.

Ethnicity will mix or disappear altogether and as far as civilization goes, who knows? Humanity as a species have always been robust and adaptive but one thing that is constant about our race is that we can be stubborn as hell and human nature hasn't changed for many thousands of years.

The only real determining factor is if we can colonize space. Earth is running out of room and resources. We either expand or we die.

 

[Windsock]

Depends where mankind goes and what struggles it must adapt to. Evolution is, obviously, survival of the fittest, and what is fit is determined by the setting.

 

[Doktor Jivaneanof]

People are going to answer that way regardless so you better get used to it. I hate it when shit posters ask for opinions then exclude most opinions because it might hurt their delicate sensibilities. That's not how it works.

I will answer this way that humans are not evolving but rather devolving because if we are take an account of the nature versus nurture argument, the decadence and decay of society, mainly in the Western world, humanity is at a crossroads now. Humanity as it stands now is becoming self-evident that its destructive and nihilistic ways may not be its undoing but it'll definitely set us back technologically and socially.

Ethnicity will mix or disappear altogether and as far as civilization goes, who knows? Humanity as a species have always been robust and adaptive but one thing that is constant about our race is that we can be stubborn as hell and human nature hasn't changed for many thousands of years.

The only real determining factor is if we can colonize space. Earth is running out of room and resources. We either expand or we die.

I didn't make that rule up because I'm offended by people saying that kind of stuff. I honestly don't care whether you think humanity's going to hell or not, don't assume that I do. I made that rule because that's not what this thread is about. I only want answers with the assumption that humanity survives long enough that it evolves into a new species. It can be a positive evolution or a negative one, but it has to be an evolution regardless, not an extinction. That's not me being sensitive about nihilism, that's me trying to keep off topic answers out of the thread. I made the rules very clear, and you broke them for no other reason than to call me out on something that isn't true. Again, I don't care if you think humanity's a loss cause, but post your thoughts on that somewhere else.

 

[Doktor Jivaneanof]

Look at the previous generations over thousands of years, and add the benefits that we've already accumulated. The problem with the classifications between the different species (that is, the species history) is that there is no exact point where it officially becomes its own 'species.' The exact point that this generation, right now, can't reproduce with the later generation? Why should the first compared species be of THIS generation and not the one after, or the many before?

I remember watching Richard Dawkins in response to the gaps argument in the fossil record ('we haven't found ____ yet!',) and he pointed out that if we had literally every single period of transition then it would be impossible to make a decision on when one is a different species, because the transition is so miniscule in each generation. The reason the names aren't literally made out of feeling within a spectrum of 'these two can't reproduce with each other,' is because of the gaps in the record. At least, that how I understand it. Could obviously be wrong.

So my smart-ass answer is: What your kids look like; evolution happens at every single new generation.

My non-smart-ass, but still disappointing, answer is: Taller, more muscle mass. Adaptations because of greater food supply, essentially. Also something about us all being variations of a 'mixed race' in there.

The dramatic answer, that is the great variation between now and what we'd commonly consider a new 'species': No idea.

Woo!

The whole thing about reproduction is something I've wondered about. How does the 'incompatability' thing come about. Would we just one day be unable to have babies with certain people?

 

[The Gunrunner]

No, because the number of generations needed would mean we'd have long since died out before then. We would never experience, or have a big impact on our lives, by the fact that macro-evolution is taking place. The only reason we'd realize it at all is if we had records of humans many, many, many, many, many years in the past.

 

[Hall Kervean]

As a Christian, I think that sometime in probably the next few thousand years the earth is going to be bathed in fire.

So, y'know.
Whatever.

 

[Imperator_tenebrae]

As a Christian, I think that sometime in probably the next few thousand years the earth is going to be bathed in fire.

So, y'know.
Whatever.

Well neither of us will live to see it so I don't see the issue.

 

[Hall Kervean]

Well neither of us will live to see it so I don't see the issue.

Didn't say there was one.

 

[Chimney Swift]

I believe that we will continue the trend of growing taller, have changes to our eye structure based on increased light exposure (technology, changes in climate and the ozone, etc), and experience minor changes in average metabolism. Obesity is such a problem that either we'll make a change ourselves or our bodies will start to adapt.

Some rare recessive genetic traits will become nonexistant, and some traits will become more universal. But overall, i think the changes will be minor.

That is, unless nuclear warfare takes over. I don't believe humanity is likely to become extermimated anytime soon, but even a small scale nuclear war could have strong effects on humanity. Aside from the obvious radiation issue, decades of nuclear winter would cause mass crop failure and famine. The population would shrink and likely disperse, causing a drastic changes in population and social structures.

But yeah. A lot of our future really relies on us.

 

[Lyrika]

AI

 

[Doktor Jivaneanof]

I believe that we will continue the trend of growing taller, have changes to our eye structure based on increased light exposure (technology, changes in climate and the ozone, etc), and experience minor changes in average metabolism. Obesity is such a problem that either we'll make a change ourselves or our bodies will start to adapt.

Some rare recessive genetic traits will become nonexistant, and some traits will become more universal. But overall, i think the changes will be minor.

That is, unless nuclear warfare takes over. I don't believe humanity is likely to become extermimated anytime soon, but even a small scale nuclear war could have strong effects on humanity. Aside from the obvious radiation issue, decades of nuclear winter would cause mass crop failure and famine. The population would shrink and likely disperse, causing a drastic changes in population and social structures.

But yeah. A lot of our future really relies on us.

What kind of traits do you think'll become recessive/ universal. Also, I know this might be a stupid thing to ask, but are you the Youtuber ChimneySwift?

 

[Doktor Jivaneanof]

AI

Like, we'll become AI?

 

[Doktor Jivaneanof]

As a Christian, I think that sometime in probably the next few thousand years the earth is going to be bathed in fire.

So, y'know.
Whatever.

You're talking about the Rapture, right? I've never read the Bible, so sorry for my ignorance.

 

[Hall Kervean]

You're talking about the Rapture, right? I've never read the Bible, so sorry for my ignorance.

WRONG

It's, ahhhh, after that bit.

 

[Birdsie]

At the current stage of development, travel, society, and culture will most likely affect our evolution as well. Assuming in the future there is little racism and travel to other parts of the world becomes easy, you might not be seeing black, white, or Hispanic humans in the next few thousand years. Just humans.

It is also likely that we become taller and develop more muscle mass, because that's just a thing that any species wants, to be honest.

 

[Lyrika]

Like, we'll become AI?

Hm. Good point. I meant something different. It's in my own opinion, but my brain can't process typing rn.

Let's change that then. I'm more of a Christian, but I'm retarded so I'll just say it depends on the future environment.

 

[Chimney Swift]

What kind of traits do you think'll become recessive/ universal. Also, I know this might be a stupid thing to ask, but are you the Youtuber ChimneySwift?

I dunno honestly. I'd have to look at the data.

No, i don't have a YouTube channel. Thanks for asking, though!